While this is a sign of the times, that the NHS is being strangled and they need to consider moves like this, Lib has the right of it:

(Original post by L i b)
Obesity is not a bloody illness and it's quite reasonable to expect people to take some responsibility for their own health. This is no different to not giving a new liver to an alcoholic who will not cut down their drinking.

By all means, the NHS should support obese people to lose weight, but it's ultimately their responsibility to take steps in that direction.

Not to mention it's actually dangerous to undertake many surgeries on obese people several times more-so than with average weight people, along with other medical complications so it's not so clear-cut as "oh we hate fat people

Maybe when the country can offer some proper opposition to the Tories we can vote them out and repair the damage, until then though welcome to austerity Britain, keep voting for Corbyn in the endless Labour leadership races, but that's never going to offer strong opposition so only have yourselves to blame every time the NHS takes another punch to it's metaphorical gut.

(Original post by Jammy Duel)
The same thing almost everywhere else in the world does, and all the places with better healthcare do: at least partially private by design, the idea bandied about by most, especially right here with Bornblue that there are only two models, our entirely nationalised system that we can't afford, or a badly designed US system that is poorly designed is simply laughable. As for his stats, South Korea spends 7.2% of GDP on health, with a generally healthy population, lower obesity, less smoking etc.

We can afford it though. Private systems do not save money, that's the point. And the closest thing the world has to a truly privatised system costs over twice as much as many nationalised systems.
South Koreas system is nationalised though, covers everyone and costs people far less than Americas privatised system. Generally regarded as one of, if not the best around.

There is no question that certain industries are better left to the 'free market ', yet you seem to be ideologically opposed to something wing provided by the state, even when it provides a better service.

Having a high quality health system, accessible to all is good for the economy, being a fiscal multiplier. If a population is healthier and can get quick and effective treatment, it's workers are more productive and have to take less time off work.

(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Livers have physical scarcity that is in large out of our control. With all the money in the world you can't just make them. We have no choice but to ration them and come up with rules of how we do so.

Unless you believe in an infinite supply of NHS funds, the same is true of any treatment.